I love it. As someone who often drives the Shands to/from work, they can't build it fast enough. There is so much truck traffic on the bridge that I often get anxious with big semis barreling towards me.

The design incorporating the pedestrian/bike path is much needed as there are so few ways to cross the St. Johns except by car/boat. It looks to me like they might leave small sections of the old bridge at both sides to serve as fishing piers? That is thoughtful because there are usually dozens of fisherman who fish from the ends of the bridge now.

I just saw proposals for three new bridges in the midwest. All used either cable stayed or decorative arch. I am just wondering if there is a way to make this bridge more iconic without breaking the piggybank.

They at least will take the center section out, to allow for sailboats and larger ships to travel past the bridge. As it is now, the larger sailboats cannot go under the current bridge. Which is weird, as this is the only bridge over the St. Johns between here and Orlando that is like that.

Does this mean they are going to raise the bridge clearance at least closer to the ICW "required" 65 feet?

Frankly, I don't care what it looks like as long as it is high enough and strong enough.

Logged

"My father says that almost the whole world is asleep. Everybody you know. Everybody you see. Everybody you talk to. He says that only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement." Patrica, Joe VS the Volcano.

So, would one have to get on a toll road to be able to use this bridge?

at one time there was discussion that people just going between US 17 and SR 13 would be able to use the bridge without a toll. The way to do that of course is only have the toll gantrys (free-flow plazas) west of 17 and east of 13.

The plan is if you get on at SR 13 and off for US 17 then there is no toll. The bridge span length determine the cost, with the exception of the main canal. A "signature bridge" cost would be out of site. As it is this crossing is around $300 million.

The plan is if you get on at SR 13 and off for US 17 then there is no toll. The bridge span length determine the cost, with the exception of the main canal. A "signature bridge" cost would be out of site. As it is this crossing is around $300 million.

The new bridge over the Ohio from Kentucky to Indiana in Louisville is forecasted at $1bn. That was for either a cable stayed tower approach or arched.

A similar project for the new I-69 bridge over the Ohio at Evansville came in at $1.4bn.

But these are significant spans traversing larger channels than the St Johns and include the cost for approaches due to such a large flood plain.

But the new Stan Musial Veterans Bridge in St Louis (the "Stan Span") over the Mississippi got built for $346 Million after going through some cost reviews. That excludes the approach costs which were costed seperately.

The new Louisville span was priced at $238 Million excluding approach costs.

So I think it is possible to be iconic based on the geography and the budget.

The plan is if you get on at SR 13 and off for US 17 then there is no toll. The bridge span length determine the cost, with the exception of the main canal. A "signature bridge" cost would be out of site. As it is this crossing is around $300 million.

$300 million is less than 15% of the full cost of the First Coast Expressway. If FDOT wanted to do something special (or if a community made them), they would find the money.